Monday, May 15, 2017

"There’s another possibility in play here: that the U.S. intelligence community is felling a number of birds with one stone. If indeed U.S. intelligence bigwigs deemed both Clinton and Trump unfit to serve as President – albeit for different reasons – they could have become involved in leaking at least the Podesta emails to weaken Clinton’s campaign, setting the candidate up for the more severe blow from FBI Director Comey in the last week of the campaign.

Then, by blaming the leaks on Russian President Putin, the U.S. intelligence leadership could set the stage for Trump’s defeat in the Electoral College, opening the door to the elevation of a more traditional Republican. However, even if that unlikely event – defeating Trump in the Electoral College – proves impossible, Trump would at least be weakened as he enters the White House and thus might not be able to move very aggressively toward a détente with Russia.

Further, the Russia-bashing that is all the rage in the mainstream U.S. media will surely encourage the Congress to escalate the New Cold War, regardless of Trump’s desires, and thus ensure plenty more money for both the intelligence agencies and the military contractors.

Official Washington’s “group think” holding Russia responsible for the Clinton leaks does draw some logical support from the near certainty that Russian intelligence has sought to penetrate information sources around both Clinton and Trump. But the gap between the likely Russian hacking efforts and the question of who gave the email information to WikiLeaks is where mainstream assumptions may fall down.

As ex-Ambassador Murray has said, U.S. intelligence was almost surely keeping tabs on Podesta’s communications because of his ties to Saudi Arabia and other foreign governments. So, the U.S. intelligence community represents another suspect in the case of who leaked those emails to WikiLeaks. It would be a smart play, reminiscent of the convoluted spy tales of John LeCarré, if U.S. intelligence officials sought to cover their own tracks by shifting suspicions onto the Russians.

But just the suspicion of the CIA joining the FBI and possibly other U.S. intelligence agencies to intervene in the American people’s choice of a president would cause President Harry Truman, who launched the CIA with prohibitions against it engaging in domestic activities, and Sen. Frank Church, who investigated the CIA’s abuses, to spin in their graves."

"[Exposed] GOP’s secret plot to replace Trump". This is Part I, with Kristol's various machinations to follow, Part II being the release of the emails to WikiLeaks (was Seth Rich CIA?), Part III being the late Comey attack on Clinton (after previously, and ridiculously, completely absolving her, and at a time when Comey had to assume a Clinton victory was a sure thing), Part IV being the electoral college shenanigans, and Part V being the various attacks on Trump based on alleged Russian dealings. One might conclude that the IC is a bunch of bumblers.

"The Scandal Hidden Behind Russia-gate" (Lazare). Rigorous summary. Good stuff on CloudStrike (and the baffling failure of the FBI to actually open an official investigation), and the funding/motives of CAP.

"The ‘Soft Coup’ of Russia-gate" (Parry). Parry discusses the neocon warmongering motives for using Russia as the basis of the attack on Trump!

"Washington’s political crisis over the Comey firing: A harbinger of revolutionary upheavals". I include this just to demonstrate how pitifully weak socialist analysis really is.

"Hours Before Being Fired, James Comey Gave “We are In Love with You” Speech to the ADL". ["Anti-Defamation League Backs Down: ‘We Are Not Aware of Any Anti-Semitic Statements from Bannon’", kowtowing to Dersh].

"There’s another possibility in play here: that the U.S. intelligence community is felling a number of birds with one stone. If indeed U.S. intelligence bigwigs deemed both Clinton and Trump unfit to serve as President – albeit for different reasons – they could have become involved in leaking at least the Podesta emails to weaken Clinton’s campaign, setting the candidate up for the more severe blow from FBI Director Comey in the last week of the campaign.

Then, by blaming the leaks on Russian President Putin, the U.S. intelligence leadership could set the stage for Trump’s defeat in the Electoral College, opening the door to the elevation of a more traditional Republican. However, even if that unlikely event – defeating Trump in the Electoral College – proves impossible, Trump would at least be weakened as he enters the White House and thus might not be able to move very aggressively toward a détente with Russia.

Further, the Russia-bashing that is all the rage in the mainstream U.S. media will surely encourage the Congress to escalate the New Cold War, regardless of Trump’s desires, and thus ensure plenty more money for both the intelligence agencies and the military contractors.

Official Washington’s “group think” holding Russia responsible for the Clinton leaks does draw some logical support from the near certainty that Russian intelligence has sought to penetrate information sources around both Clinton and Trump. But the gap between the likely Russian hacking efforts and the question of who gave the email information to WikiLeaks is where mainstream assumptions may fall down.

As ex-Ambassador Murray has said, U.S. intelligence was almost surely keeping tabs on Podesta’s communications because of his ties to Saudi Arabia and other foreign governments. So, the U.S. intelligence community represents another suspect in the case of who leaked those emails to WikiLeaks. It would be a smart play, reminiscent of the convoluted spy tales of John LeCarré, if U.S. intelligence officials sought to cover their own tracks by shifting suspicions onto the Russians.

But just the suspicion of the CIA joining the FBI and possibly other U.S. intelligence agencies to intervene in the American people’s choice of a president would cause President Harry Truman, who launched the CIA with prohibitions against it engaging in domestic activities, and Sen. Frank Church, who investigated the CIA’s abuses, to spin in their graves."

"[Exposed] GOP’s secret plot to replace Trump". This is Part I, with Kristol's various machinations to follow, Part II being the release of the emails to WikiLeaks (was Seth Rich CIA?), Part III being the late Comey attack on Clinton (after previously, and ridiculously, completely absolving her, and at a time when Comey had to assume a Clinton victory was a sure thing), Part IV being the electoral college shenanigans, and Part V being the various attacks on Trump based on alleged Russian dealings. One might conclude that the IC is a bunch of bumblers.

"The Scandal Hidden Behind Russia-gate" (Lazare). Rigorous summary. Good stuff on CloudStrike (and the baffling failure of the FBI to actually open an official investigation), and the funding/motives of CAP.

"The ‘Soft Coup’ of Russia-gate" (Parry). Parry discusses the neocon warmongering motives for using Russia as the basis of the attack on Trump!

"Washington’s political crisis over the Comey firing: A harbinger of revolutionary upheavals". I include this just to demonstrate how pitifully weak socialist analysis really is.

"Hours Before Being Fired, James Comey Gave “We are In Love with You” Speech to the ADL". ["Anti-Defamation League Backs Down: ‘We Are Not Aware of Any Anti-Semitic Statements from Bannon’", kowtowing to Dersh].